Chrysler has been on a steady upswing since the dark days of bankruptcy. Throughout its merger with Fiat, each model has been updated or completely replaced. Jeep has been the shining star of the core brands, selling every Grand Cherokee and Wrangler they can make. Even the controversially styled Cherokee has been fairly well receieved. The next vehicle in the Jeep lineup will be the small Renegade, designed to attract “a new wave of youthful and adventurous customers around the world to the brand.” We concur.

I recently attended a local media event where Jeep brought two Renegade pre-production vehicles, which were previously seen on the auto show circuit; red Latitude and a gray Trailhawk. Because they’re such early builds, there was no driving allowed. What we did get was a close look at these early examples, and lots of face time with the people responsible for the Renegade.

When it goes on sale in the first quarter of 2015, the Renegade will be available in four flavors: Sport, Latitude, Limited, and Trailhawk. All models will be available in either front or all wheel drive, with the exception of the Trailhawk which will be exclusively 4×4. Jeep is mum on two key factors: gas mileage and price, but expect over 30mpg on the highway.

Under the hood will be one of two familiar engines: the Sport and Latitude will come with a 1.4 liter turbo which produces 160hp and 184lb-ft of torque, and the Tigershark 2.4 liter, which makes 184hp and 177 lb-ft. The Tigershark engine will be standard on Limited and Trailhawk, but optional on other trim levels. The turbo engine will be available with a six-speed manual transmission in both 4×2 and 4×4 versions. The 2.4-liter engine will be available only with a 9-speed automatic. When properly equipped, this Italian-made Renegade will be able to tow 2000lbs.

Despite the front-drive bias, the full-time 4×4 mode can be manually engaged, and each Renegade has a Land Rover-like terrain response system, dubbed Selec-Terrain, with an available rock crawling mode. The Trailhawk adds increased ride height, skid plates, tow hooks, a full-size spare, hill-descent control, and unique fascias that sacrifice aerodynamics in favor of better approach and departure angles. There will also be a low-range mode with a 20:1 crawl ratio.

Where every vehicle in this category looks like a different flavor of the same blob, the Renegade is very square, and its Fiat roots are covered up by a shrunken down Wrangler mold. Jeep says it “combines the Jeep brand’s heritage with fresh new styling” but everyone will say that looks cute. Despite the somewhat cartoony looks, I like it just because it is so square and so different looking.

Renegade’s most interesting exterior design is a roof which consists of two manually removable roof panels. Inspired by Wrangler’s hardtop, the My Sky roof will be available on all models. On all but the Sport model, the My Sky can be ordered with power retraceable glass sunroofs, a la BMW wagons, which are also manually removable.

The interior is very similar to other new Chrysler vehicles. Front and center is the newest version of the familiar Uconnect system which has developed a reputation for being quick and easy to use. Keeping it simple are three dials for climate control, with the minimum amount of buttons. Below that are aux and USB inputs, 12v receptacle, and the Selec-Terrain system knob. Interior materials on these pre-production vehicles were not the final molds, but expect something similar to what is on the Chrysler 200. Subtle Jeep design cues are also present throughout the interior.

The Renegade is a very interesting vehicle and a huge step up from the Patriot and the Compass. Like those two vehicles, it will be frowned upon by hardcore Jeep enthusiasts, but if the final product is a good mix of the two Cherokees and the Wrangler, there is no way it cannot succeed.

petezeiss, that may be what’s coming down the pike in the future but I’m not into being crammed into sardine-can-like rides, like those for the masses in the rest of the world.

And I believe MOST Americans will fight that trend tooth and nail by buying more F150 pickup trucks and Camry midsized sedans. That’s seems to be the trend as to why the truck makers put squirrel engines in their pickup trucks now.

Interesting development to underscore that, the NEW Tacoma has been seen in the open, testing, and the mules appear to be even bigger than the current version of the Tacoma.

With GM’s midsizers going on sale in the future, I knew Toyota would get off their dead @ss and upgrade and improve the best-selling, legendary Tacoma. There is a market for midsize pickup trucks, even as the US market is converging with the rest of the world.

HDC,
You’re not wrong about a significant chunk of the American market, especially those wanting to put their families into the safest vehicles they can afford.

But I also think that the ADM has become so tremendously diversified that a profitable segment exists for groovy little rides like the Renegade.

The reality that vehicles like this, the Element, Soul, Cube and xB are always marketed at 20-somethings but really intended for their parents dovetails nicely with the still dominant buying demographic of empty-nest boomers.

Bottom of the ninth and two-out for the middle-class ADM; Sergio hits a grand-slam.

Marcelo, small cars are still niche vehicles in the US. They’re available, but the volume sellers are mid-size cars, mid-size CUVs, and full-size pickup trucks. Americans are buying cars that are significantly more fuel efficient, but mostly packaged as fairly large 4-cylinder family sedans.

petezeiss, “The reality that vehicles like this, the Element, Soul, Cube and xB are always marketed at 20-somethings but really intended for their parents dovetails nicely with the still dominant buying demographic of empty-nest boomers.”

Very well put, and right on the money! But I don’t see many old people driving around in them. And that’s where the money is. With the baby boomers, empty nesters and old DINKs.

I can appreciate that the Renegade will sell to a certain demographic in the American domestic market. And much of that is driven by, as you stated, what “they can afford.”

I also agree with you on, ” the ADM has become so tremendously diversified that a profitable segment exists for groovy little rides like the Renegade.”

But in spite of all that, there is a reason why the entire line of full-size pickup trucks are the best selling vehicles in the ADM, and that the Camry and the Accord are the best-selling sedans in the ADM.

I have always believed in “the more, the merrier” and have said so many times. But this miniaturization of America’s transportation will eventually lead to a reduction in choices we Americans have.

One of the saddest days for me was the day that production of the Towncar, Crown Vic/Mercury Marquis ended. Those were cars of substance, highly valued even today in this age of pregnant roller skates and sardine cans on wheels.

One can argue that the new vehicles are infinitely better than those old ones, but the old ones had a certain charm none of the new ones possess.

Then again, like many of my vintage, I also have very fond memories of Packards and Studebakers.

I do not miss our trouble-prone Grand Wagoneer 4X4, but currently enjoy an excellent ownership with our 2012 Grand Cherokee 4X4.

Even though I also believe the Renegade will sell quite well, I believe it will be to a specific demographic, because of the Jeep name and heritage and because there are very few AWD/4WD/4X4 vehicles in this segment.

“One of the saddest days for me was the day that production of the Towncar, Crown Vic/Mercury Marquis ended. Those were cars of substance, highly valued even today…”

It wasn’t always that way, my friend. When I was in the USAF, a co-worker of mine tried to sell his big-engined wagon (not even 12 years old) for $1,000–and no takers. He turned around and sold the engine alone for $1500 and scrapped the body for $50, making more money parting it out than intact.

Which reminds me: I have a ’90 F-150 with a surprisingly clean body (almost no rust) and a 5.0 EFI under the hood. $3,000 intact or will part (you remove parts). 8′ bed is almost completely rust-free–including the wheel wells.

@Vulpine, as ever more pregnant roller skates and sardine cans on wheels begin appearing on the highways and byways of America, that’s when many of us begin to appreciate the cars we once took for granted.

Oh, I know that those cars of old required a ton of TLC, maintenance and repair. And they were not at all fuel-efficient. Ahhhhh, but they were real cars!

Compared to what is on the roads today, I’d take my wife’s ’92 Towncar for “situational presence” anyday, anytime, anywhere. People thought twice, nay, three times, before making any irrational moves around you that might cut you off, or have you roll right over them because you could not stop all that heft on a dime.

Like you, I often parted out my old cars and then took what was left of the carcass to a junkyard, had it weighed and took cash money for the metal left-overs.

Since I bought the Tundra in January 2011, and had to get rid of all my old cars behind the house as part of the deal with my wife, I only have our current three vehicles and four utility trailers parked out there. Nothing else. No bikes. No other cars. No other trucks.

@Highdesertcat: “Oh, I know that those cars of old required a ton of TLC, maintenance and repair. And they were not at all fuel-efficient. Ahhhhh, but they were real cars!”

That really depends on your definition of “real cars!” I learned to drive in a 1965 Buick Electra 225 with the big Wildcat 445 under the hood. I won’t deny that as a three-ton barge the thing had remarkable power under the hood–but every year it managed to SPLIT at least one of its steel wheels because it was so heavy. Sure, it rode soft, but those ‘cushy’ seats made my rear-end ache after only an hour behind the wheel. By comparison, my ’64 Chevy II was almost luxurious in its seat comfort (firm without being hard) even though it lacked all the “luxury” amenities and carried a little 194 c.i.d inline six under the hood. I will admit though, that Chevy II was extraordinarily easy to work on. You could stand in the engine bay with it to perform almost any repair task. Just try that with any car built after the ’70s.

No, to me a “real car” is one that’s easy to drive, easy to maneuver, is comfortable (by that I don’t necessarily mean plush) and can get out of its own way. At 96 horsepower, that was my old Chevy IIs worst problem. What you call ‘sardine cans’ are only that if you intend to carry more than one passenger on a regular basis. My Camaro had less interior room than most of those “sardine cans” you so revile. Meanwhile, simply because of their quickness and agility, drivers of those “sardine cans” WILL cut off that ’92 Towncar simply because the thing’s such a barge that it can’t get out of its own way! Granted, every time I see someone do that I call them an idiot, but they also trust their car to do what they want, WHEN they want it, without having to plan their maneuver a quarter-mile in advance. There’s a difference in having a car you can trust to perform as needed and having one you can’t trust to even make a safe ‘emergency’ lane change.

There’s also the issue of such “situational presence” cars simply being too big for the road. One of the most frightening cars I ever owned was a 1973 Ford Gran Torino because every time I had to cross a bridge on a 4-lane highway, I felt like I was going to scrape the side of the car on the bridge. I get that same feeling in my 1990 F-150 and on some two-lane roads where I live I’m constantly afraid I’ll scrape the side of the truck on encroaching brush (and have) and drop a wheel off the pavement (and have). Now granted I have enough years of experience that I don’t let those shake me, but that happened one time to my wife as she was driving it and she flat REFUSES to drive the truck any more–despite it being the only vehicle we own that she’s currently able to drive (automatic transmission vs stick in the Jeep). Yes, she’s learning how to drive the jeep, but she doesn’t have her clutch coordination down yet.

Now don’t get me wrong, I do agree that some cars are just TOO small. Personally I’m not a fan of the Fiat 500, BMW MINI and similar-sized cars despite their incredible agility. I’m personally more comfortable in what are called ‘mid-sized’ cars today, but that’s more because of the outer dimensions, not interior. If you bother to climb into a Fiat 500, the front seats are quite comfortable, though admittedly you can’t stretch out across a bench seat and take a nap. My 50-pound dog would be quite happy if the car didn’t have a back seat at all–just a shelf where he could lie reasonably flat. Then again, he also likes to feel secure and not get thrown around, so he takes to the floor no matter what we’re riding.

I understand you like the feeling of size around you; I prefer that feeling as well, up to a point. Our difference is in how MUCH size you’re comfortable with, where I prefer agility and a sense of free space around the car and you prefer the largest possible. This F-150 is the largest vehicle I’ve ever purchased for myself (the Gran Torino was a gift) while I was quite comfortable in my first-generation Saturn Vue which was noticeably smaller and more basic than the Chevy Equinox which is its direct descendant (both Opel-based). That’s also why I am so adamant about the fact that today’s full-sized pickup trucks are simply too big and even today’s so-called mid-sized trucks are larger than I like. I’m just not comfortable in them because they’re so large.

@Vulpine, I understand that people’s preferences matter and they should buy what works for them; that’s what makes the world go ’round.

All four of my kids pretty much feel the same way you do about their cars. They tend to buy for exactly the same reasons you stated.

And I’m OK with that too. The Yank Tanks of old never intimidated me and I was never one to lose sleep over mpg and fuel economy.

My dad and my mom’s brother ran a Dragster powered by a 426 Hemi, and they were always calculating fuel load for a run in “gallons per mile.”

And growing up in a large family that required large vehicles to get around, I always felt claustrophobic in vehicles like the VW Bug, Austin-Healy 3000, Pinto, Vega, and the like.

These days, that size of vehicle has become the norm as CAFE and EPA mandates are forcing OEMs to limit our buying choices, or severely chastise buyers if they want to buy large by excessive cost penalties.

Shoot… I like the Renegade. I’d be seen in one in the light of day before an Element, if I’m honest. Sure, it’s twee and kitschy, maybe a tad “Imma a Jeep, too!”, but as the article points out, it’s different. And that really goes a long way in today’s beige-box automarket.

Even those who NOW believe this represents some form of step forward for FCA (and especially, the Chrysler/Jeep brand), should pay particular heed to the fact that this Renegade shares its chassis, motors a d many other mechanical components with the Fiat 500, which should trouble rational consumers (Fix It Again Tony, unlike the Maytag Repairman, never gets bored; only more busy – and refer to Jack’s Fiat 500L review to get a taste of the awful reliability and build quality that these Serb-Italian products possess).

Sales of Fiat products in the U.S. are only going to decline over time, as the realization sets in that these vehicles are quite a bit less reliable (and more importantly, durable, as in sh!t just breaks outright or falls off of them) than even the LESS reliable VWs.

Fiat is going to single-handedly disprove the myth that “all modern cars are reliable.”

I know my comments will provoke bile, vitriol & maybe even death wishes from those, who like khrodes, have owned their Abarth for all of 18 months without problem (and I genuinely hope he has a healthy, loving, reliable long term relationship with his Abarth – honestly, but doubt it’s in the cards), but Fiat level un-reliability is NOT what Americans truly want, as Honda & Toyota proved as they first took over coastal areas of the U.S. during the initial Japanese invasion, and then proceeded to kick a$$ and take VINs by the millions of former domestic vehicle owners in even the most flyover sections of the American Heartland.

Fiat will fail in North America for the same reason Honda & Toyota mostly failed in Europe; there’s a prioritized list of qualities & traits that couldn’t be more different between what the average European and the average American/Canadian desire, that’s as large as the ocean that separates them.

Europeans buy what are fantastically unreliable vehicles such as Fiats, Citroens, Renaults, Peugeots, etc. (by North American standards), and largely dismiss reliable Toyotas, Hondas, Mazdas, etc., for a side variety of reasons rooted in such things as culture, history, economics, population distribution & infrastructure.

Deadweight, there are some obsessed Chrysler fans on other forums breathlessly defending any perceived criticism of their vehicles to the tune of 40 comments per article. Can I cut and paste your comment above just to watch them go bonkers?

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

Yup. Toyota. Nissan. Mazda. Kia. Hyundai. You see, facts and evidence work against you in this case; every one of those brands started out in this country with people making the same kinds of claims that you’re now making against Fiat and VW. Look where those companies are now–INCLUDING Volkswagen.

Meh… could’ve said the same about Hyundia/Kia 10 years ago. Anyone can fail, anyone can improve. Except for trucks I’ve bought Japanese for 30 years and I’ll try to keep the same open mind that led me to buy my 5-door Stanza way back then.

I’m a big fan of many of ChryCo’s offerings, going so far as to deem some of their vehicles as the best value-quality proposition in their respective class by a long way.

Three such vehicles are:

1) 2014 Dodge Durango Pentastar (with the 8 speed vs former 5 speed transmission). This vehicle rides and handles as well if not better than the much higher priced Mercedes GL upon which it’s based, and can be had decently equipped with the V6 Pentastar for close to 30k if aggressively shopped);

2) Chrysler 300 (any trim). Who else offers a genuinely luxuriously riding, RWD or AWD, well equipped in even base trim, reliable, solid, quiet vehicle like this, in the grand tradition of American Cruisers, for as little as 26k (base with leather and w/out the electronic gadgetry)? I put it’s ride, solidity and quietness up against ANY rival, foreign or domestic, costing as much as 20k more, and the 300 will equal or beat that vehicle in most important attributes.

3) Dodge Charger. C’mon. The refreshed one with the Pentastar, better interior fit/finish and 8 speed transmission is an absolute bargain from real world pricing of around 22k for models that are well equipped even in base trim (for those who don’t want the appliance like CamCordSonOptiMalibus).

But the Fiat based ChryCo’s? BAD MOVE and three if not four steps back in terms of Chrysler’s interests. The association alone will unleash havoc on Chrysler’s reputation once these Fiats are in the hands of many more consumers, who will have to live with them, and have them fixed, on a daily basis, for years to come.

Did a Fiat bugger your mother? Or was there some other reason you copypasta’d the same thing in this and the Fiat thread? I don’t really care about Fiat one way or another, but this seems a tad passionate.

The 500 Abarth has the best stock exhaust note of any car I’ve heard (any attainable car, anyway). One can only hope the Jeep brand see the potential and build a Renegade SRT with bits straight out of the Abarth.

Will be a sure cash cow for FCA in the US where I believe sales will be stellar and will serve very nicely to introduce or reintroduce Jeep all over the world. For better or worse, this is exactly the kind of car people want. The square lines will certainly attract a masculine public and the relative cuteness means it is appealling to women too.

One small nitpick, the Sky Window has been available in Fiats forever. Find it hard to believe the Wrangler is an inspiration for that. Trying to duiguise its Fiatness is disingenious as the Italian feel for design is quite evident inside and out. I would also be curious to sit in this to see if the seating position is similar to the 500L.

The 2014 Grand Cherokee has been a roaring success, after they got all the bugs worked out.

The Cherokee is also doing well, at least in my area, and this Renegade will also do well with its demographic, especially overseas.

I would like to see what the new 2016 Grand Cherokee will look like after it is restyled, and before it is introduced in the Spring of 2015. Such was the path of success for the 2014 Grand Cherokee which went on sale in March 2013.

Buyers of the 2013 Grand Cherokee took it in the shorts after only six months production and if the plan for the 2016 Grand Cherokee is on track, buyers of the 2015 Grand Cherokee may have to do the same, if it is put out for sale in the Spring of 2015.

Speaking of Sportages and touching on my only serious gripe about CR-Vs, the tendency of manufacturers to keep growing these cute utes after initial success with small first-gereration versions annoys me.

It’s shocking to see an early Sportage now and compare it to the pointy-snoot, elongated and bloated current model. Will the same thing happen to a successful Renegade?

It looks like a butch Soul, kinda. They should use guinea pigs for their marketing campaign.

All joking aside, I kind of like it and wouldn’t mind trying it out some day. I’ve always been ambivalent about Chrysler and its ilk and wouldn’t write this off. I’m just trying to get a sense of the scale as given in the picture.

Does anybody know how much this shares with the 500L? I think the Renegade and 500 L look enough alike for me to believe they would come off the same assembly line, with just different body panels and appearance bits. And are the engines all Italian?

According to FCA press releases, the Renegade will be built in Italy for the European and US markets, using engines sourced from the US, Italy, and Brazil. Meanwhile, the 500L is built at a different plant in Serbia.

I like it. I guess “hardcore Jeep enthusiasts” miss the day when Jeep only sold serious wheeling vehicles? Which is a fantasy period that never actually happened. 2wd Jeepsters and XJ’s prove as much; they were fine, just not rock or mud rigs (that’s as wistful as I can get about them). I had a STOCK ’78 QuadraTrac Cherokee, and it didn’t really have any serious 4-wheeling ambitions, no low range, same ground clearance as any 2wd pickup and some cars of the day; it was an early mall crawler.

Late 80s. MJ, Xj, YJ, and SJ all available with low range. Maybe the full size sj was the least offroady, but look at early 90s. XJ, YJ, ZJ. All very offroad capable, and my 93 xj would love to prove your opinion otherwise :) most of the appeal lies in being easily modifiable to be an offroad monster. For 1000$ you have a lift and tires and can accomplish many other simple mods that will ensure you’ll almost never get stuck. On a similar IFS blazer, look at 1000 for just a lift. For a newer FWD jeep, forget about it.

I was caught at a traffic light in front of my local Nissan dealer. They had 10 new Jukes lined up for traffic to see. If they are selling enough Jukes to merit having 10 in stock, then this car will do fine. OTOH, Mossy Nissan seems pretty bad at inventory control. They rent adjacent lots and fill them with non-salable 2WD Xterras, NV200 cabs, and such.

Luckily, there are many who think neither are hideous. The design of the Cherokee is intentionally provocative as has been discussed many times on this very site. And on the street it seems people have started to like even more. The Renegade is certainly much less controversial and puts together all the elements, including design, that will make it a worldwide hit.

I keep staring at the front end of the new Cherokees I see, but somehow I just can’t see the headlights stand out much in their “buried” position…it looks like the upper turn lights still ARE the headlights. Designed this way on purpose? But why? Any ways, overall not so ugly (as in Juke…or Aztec)….’course I did drive an Element for 4 years, so what do I know?

As long as they keep building the great vehicles in the Dodge and Ram divisions, an these sell as well as they do, keep em coming.

Jeep has lost its cache as an offroad brand, so the risk of losing that is no longer a threat. As for now its a cute-ute brand that happens to sell 1 offroad vehicle to interest everyone who doesn’t want the minivan stigma.

Jeep is still the most off-road capable brand, more than any other. Each vehicle has a specific off-road trim that actually perform impressively, and the Wrangler is still the most capable off-roader period. Tell us more about how they’re not an off-road brand anymore.

There used to be a 4×4 station wagon, didnt mean it was capable of going down basic hunting paths in the winter.

Just because you powder coat some tow hooks red, inexplicably add low profile black rims and add a viscous coupling to a FWD biased system, doesn’t mean its capable of offroading anymore than other crossovers.

Their selling an appearance package, not an offroad package. Appearance in this case sells a lot better than actual capability and performance. Granted the one time these go into a muddy field for an estate auction and get stuck, the owner certainly won’t have a hard time finding the tow hook, if he’s willing to let it get scratched…

The latest models with the Trailhawk packages are definitely a lot more than appearance packages. You should really look into them to see what they include some pretty serious features that make them much more off-road capable than crossovers from other brands.

Even the Patriot with the off road drive II package can tackle some pretty gnarly stuff.

Of course there will always be some that deride anything that doesn’t have a ladder frame and solid axles as incabable, but that’s just not the case anymore.

Come now, I offroad and own H1s, I’m willing to listen to what you/they have to offer, doesn’t require solid axles.

But unless your going to pull some transformer s@&t, and turn your quite, soft riding road tires into 35″ offroad tires, lift the entire body up a foot without compromising its center of gravity, and push a magical button to pop out rocksliders to prevent creases in the uniframe sheet metal; than your telling me a load of garbage.

You simply can’t defy the basic anatomy of the vehicle and redefine offroading to match what you have to offer. Having all 4 wheels spinning is the best this machine can do, appropriate ground clearence, approach/departure/break over angles and most importantly appropriate tires are a necessity, not an option. I’ve seen driveways that this couldn’t make judging by the front bumper.

That driveway btw has a few holes in it that had full size cinder blocks to level out (poorly I might add) the holes.

I’m comparing what Jeep offers off the factory floor to anything else offered of the factory floor. Not purpose built rock crawlers or mud boggers. Those few people that demand that can still be satisfied by the Wrangler and Ram which can be easily modified for such purposes.

+10 on the Wrangler. If I needed to go off-road for fun or profit on a regular basis, this is still the go-to! It may not be as cushy on-road, per CR, but that isn’t the Wrangler’s raison d’etre anyhow!

(And the fact that any Jeep can be optioned-out to “Trail-Rated” status at least shows that they’re trying! The last of the Patriots sure look the part of the original YJ (or whatever) Cherokee, and according to a couple folks I know, have decent off-road chops; only the Compass missed the plot a little.)

There is no brand with more historic cache than jeep in the world, they are the sole reason why fiat resuscitated the corpse of cerberus and the only reason Mercedes Benz bought cjd and the only reason why Chrysler bought amc.

Yup, that’s the way I see it too. The 2012 Grand Cherokee V6 my wife drives is more competent on-roadf and off-road than ANY of the other 4X4 vehicles we have owned over the past 49 years of marriage, excepting other Jeeps, like our last Grand Wagoneer 4X4.

BAFO, of course ‘Murica’ is what applies here since the vast majority of people offering comments on ttac have never been outside of the US or Canada, or have crossed the Gobi desert in a 4X4.

The Grand Cherokee derives its heritage and its capabilities from the old Willy’s Overland Jeep that was instrumental in providing a wide range of transportation solutions during WWII, and was used by many of the Allies, including the Brits, Canadians, Russians, National Chinese, and later after WWII the Israelis.

Many of the Jeeps built by Ford were still in use decades after WWII ended, and Overland had died.

Use of WWII Jeeps continued during the Korean conflict and while I was in Nam in 1967, we still used that old WWII Jeep there, and so did the Aussies and South Koreans who were in the fight there with us ‘Muricans’.

I read an article many years back about how every other nation wanted the capabilities of the old WWII Jeeps and started developing their own, even the Russians and Chinese, right along with the Brits, Dutch, French, Italians, Germans, and even the neutral Swedes. That’s why we have the Land Cruiser, Range Rover, Gelande Wagen, DAF Landmacht Wagen, et al.

Jeep has come a long way since then, expanding successfully into the civilian market, but its hard-earned reputation as a proven all-terrain vehicle under fire still stands.

And my boys and I did it in old WWII vintage Jeeps bought cheap from the Surplus store, and IHC Scouts.

In America, World Series Baseball is indeed one of the top-rated seasonal sports, next to American Football.

Soccer? Not even on the horizon after Basketball, Girls Beach Volleyball or Golf.

The International Sport of choice may be Soccer for the rest of the world but participation in the US is niche. Americans have never warmed up to it, not even during the recent World Cup/Copa Mundial.

The big money in the US is on MLB Baseball, NFL Football, all Basketball and Golf.

I went to MLB Spring Training in Phoenix, AZ, March/April this year, and it was very well attended. Ditto with Tampa Bay, I learned.

So, yeah, Baseball is big in the US, Canada, Japan and South Korea.

What are the sports of choice down under? When I was stationed in Europe during the seventies, we spent quite a bit of time in England with English friends and they took us to Soccer, Rugby, Cricket and Polo matches, while we were there.

Car manufacturers cannot just make niche vehicles now. In an increasingly competitive environment you need to broaden your appeal. Outside of the wrangler, xtrerra, 4runner, fj, and the pickups please name a NEW vehicle that is more offroad capable than this?

Don’t bet on it, Hummer. There’s nothing else out there bone stock that can do what most Jeeps do.

And before you go touting those full-sized pickup trucks, tell me, how many of them really do the technical off-roading as well as Jeeps? Most are simply too big to get through many locations while they all lack enough weight in the tail to have the traction where it’s most needed–unless you load it down with things likely to get thrown out by all the jouncing. Sure, trucks are great for desert running and maybe even good for muddin’, but when it comes to the tight one-way in or out roads (think Wolf Creek Pass), a Jeep or something as small as a Jeep is the only effective choice.

So how big (or small) is this thing? I know it’s related to the Fial 500L, and if it’s the size of the L then it’s really small. I was under the impression, initially, that it was the size of the Patriot which is quite a bit bigger than the 500L, if I’m not mistaken.

Yes. At 6’2″ 230lbs I was fine in the driver’s seat in all dimensions, especially the headroom. You do sit more vertically than most cars.
In the back, I was able to sit “behind myself”, but my knees were bent 90 degrees. I wouldn’t want to sit there for too long. While I wouldn’t choose this Jeep as a family vehicle, a rear-facing kid’s seat would fit with minimal intrusion toward the back of the front seats.

I still prefer the Patriot (and even the Compass) hands down for looks, compared to the Cherokee and Renegade. A Patriot body with the 2.4L Tigershark and 6 MT and the full time AWD mode would be my ultimate modern Jeep CUV, but of course nothing like that will exist.

On a serious note though, why no 2.4/6MT combo? Based on my experience with the Dart, the 2.4L is better suited to the manual than the small turbo.

In the USA according to Autotrader there are 138 new 2014 Jeep Patriots with manual transmissions and 4×4. However, do note that Autotrader has a flaw where sometimes the dealers incorrectly code a select-shift automatic as a manual transmission. But I found at least one example amongst those 138 that was a 2.4L, 4×4, and a manual.

And it just dawned on me that the Jeep Patriot is using the 2.4L GEMA and not the 2.4L Tiger Shark. I got you now.

Still, I share your love of the Jeep Patriot. If you look at it side by side with the classic XJ Cherokee the Patriot is the real “new Cherokee”. It matches the XJ in all dimensions almost inch for inch and even the power levels are similar as well as basic features.

I admit that I don’t know much about off roading and Jeeps, but I seem to remember an off-roading site did a review on the Jeep Patriot on a trail and their verdict was “not nearly as bad as we feared”. I would have to google search for it again, and I tend to be cautious of referencing other publications in comments on publications websites.

From this on-road driver perspective, the Jeep Patriot looks a lot like an XJ.

The 4.0 only had 240 ft lbs and had a 4 speed and this renegade has 185 but a 9 speed so it’ll be in the meat of the power band more and the cherokee only had 7.8 inches of ground clearance, the comparison is quite valid

I think it is a huge fallacy to compare published numbers for ground clearance for a traditional, solid rear axle SUV and independent suspension CUVs. That old XJ may have had ‘only’ 7.9 inches of clearance, under the rear diff, the lowest hanging part of any solid rear axle truck/SUV. Off road, that isn’t as big of a deal since it is in the same axis as the rear wheels, and is a big old chunk of steel that can take quite a hit from a rock. Elsewhere, I bet that cherokee had 9-10 inches of clearance (most of the underbody). Not having that rear pumpkin lets the CUVs claim 8+ inches of ground clearance on paper, but that doesn’t really mean much in the real world.

A new Forester (one of the most offroad worthy CUVs) has 8.7 inches of ground clearance. My old 4runner measures (with a tape measure) exactly 9 inches at the rear diff on 265/70R16 tires. Park them side by side though and you’ll see how meaningless those numbers are. Not only does the Toyota have 11-12 inches of clearance on most of the skid-plated underbody, but the approach/departure/breakover angles are much much better.

I predict that in the near future Jeep will look like Porsche. Hear me out. Porsche currently makes a varied lineup of cars including a sedan, an SUV, and sports cars. In fact, Porsche sells more Cayenne SUV’s than anything else that they make. Combined, SUV and sedan sales outnumber their sports car sales. With the introduction of the Macan that gulf is sure to only widen. So why sell so few sports cars? Couldn’t they make more money focusing on more profitable SUV’s and cutting the 911, Boxster, and Cayman? In theory maybe, but in reality what makes Porsche special and not just another BMW is in fact their sports cars. Without the 911 around they are just another high end German luxury car maker. With the 911 they are something different.

Now back to Jeep. I am afraid to break it to Jeep enthusiasts but the only way Jeep is going to be a profitable enterprise going forward is to sell cute-utes to millions of soccer moms, sorority girls, and urban “off roaders”. Just like how Porsche enthusiasts have had to realize that the only way Porsche will continue to make 911’s is with the sales of thousands of luxury SUV’s. Now, will Jeep discontinue the solid axle Wrangler to focus on cute-utes? Maybe but I believe that they would be stupid to do so. Without the hard-core off-road solid axle rock crawlers Jeep is just another SUV company. With it, and like Porsche they are something special and unique in the market.

In short, Jeep will have to build these car-based cute-utes or they will just be a money pit for FCA; deal with it. But rejoice, for not only will they build your hard-core off-road rock crawler, they have to build it.

Agree. I even envision, in the future, with the worldwide growth of the Jeep brand, of Jeep hatches and sedans in more pliable parts of the world. 4×4 Jeep cars? Laugh, but they would be instante Subaru, even Quattro, competitors.

This thing is going to be HUGE globally for Jeep. If they price it right and the built in Italy quality is up to snuff, they are going to have a runaway hit on their hands. It is not a replacement for the Patriot/Compass, but a size class below. The next Jeeps up after Renegade will be the single model replacement for the Patriot/Compass twins, and the range topping (Grand) Wagoneer. Jeep is on a roll and will be printing money for FCA.

” …designed to attract “a new wave of youthful and adventurous customers around the world to the brand.”

As the owner of a Honda Element, that line made me laugh. That was Honda’s tag for the Element, but they actually sold to people like me: middle-aged empty nester. That said, I like the Renegade so far, can’t wait to hear how it drives.

I miss my Element…my son bought it, so I do see it once in a while. But I too am a middle aged “almost” empty nester. I never thought I would want it until I drove it. The salesman left me take it overnight (I know, the “Puppy dog” close) and that was it.

There’s no such thing, Dan. Trailhawk only comes with 2.4L and that one only comes with the 9sp ZF. And as an awoved hater of the obsolete transmission designs, I still think it’s a loss. They could’ve borrowed a tranny from Patriot if they wanted, but they decided not to do it. The oddest thing is, their factory is going to build a truly bewildering array of drivetrain versions in Renegade, they just decided not to supply us a manual transmission in Trailhawk. Because Chrysler hates you.

You know what’s odd, I managed to hit the HOT OIL for the first time in my Wrangler a few days ago. I went across the Imogene pass and hit it some 600 ft from the top, where they have last 2 shaft stacks on the left. I was trying to pass the whole thing without going to 4×4 Low and apparently that made too much heat in TQ. I let it cool for 5 minute, then shifted into low and completed the climb without issues. I think it’s something like 13,000 ft alitude. Thinking that maybe manual is not such a bad idea for certain applications after all.

I’ve adored this little bugger since it was first announced. I only wish it were a Honda so I could really light the fanboi afterburners. But I’m wanting to slightly downsize from CR-Vs (or get back to their original size) so brand loyalty will not stop me from test driving this.

This wee beastie and it’s Patriot and Compass brothers have something a lot of other CUV don’t have. The ABILITY to shift into 4WD. CR-V, RAV4, Escape, and Encore all have some “specials sauce” sensors that will engage the 4WD for you. That doesn’t appeal to some of us. Ergo, I think any CUV review should state whether or not it can be shifted inton 4WD. Under 25k? Ability to shift into 4WD? Will the 4Wd really only be used in nasty weather/ a few times a year in slick areas? I think FCA has a hit.

The Subaru XV Crosstrek has full time 4WD. The CR-V AWD always starts in 4WD and then disengages the back axle if it’s not needed once a set speed is reached. The availability of low range is a novel feature, but it is one that almost all SUVs had until manufacturers figured out that few buyers cared.

Did the Escape just switch to a fully-automatic, no-button-for-you AWD system on the most recent Kuga model? Because my ’02 Mazda Tribute (essentially an Escape with blobbier sheet metal) has a nice button I can press, and presumably the 2nd gen did too, still being on the CD2 platform.

What kind of mileage do you get on that, if you don’t mind me asking? With my V6/auto/AWD combo I’m averaging 20-21, but that’s mostly highway driving to and from school.
On a trip to Illinois I got 23 MPG even while going 77 on the interstate, with a solid-but-slightly-outdated 4-speed auto. Eat that, EPA rating.
As for “old and worn out,” I got it 3-1/2 years ago at 111K, and now it’s nearing 140K with no problems other than some minor electrical gremlins. I’ll have to drive it into the ground, though, to make up the shot resale value since MN believes invisible hail damage warrants a damaged title.

I’m very much intrigued by this. The 20:1 crawl is nothing to write home about (my Wrangler has 70:1, and even Grand Vitara had 24:1), but I can try and live with it.

I’m going to give Renegade a serious consideration when I get back on market around 2018. We’ll see how well it holds together by that time. I am concerned that this thing may start to fall apart in off-road use.

This essentially is a 21st century Geo Tracker except the Tracker was technically based on a rugged light-truck chassis and certified as a light truck. This is a Fiat car butched up. Have fun, I’ll be laughing at you in your not-a-Jeep.

I wouldn’t trust it in ankle deep water. Forget about Detroit streets! It draws air from inside the fender, but how low is the snorkel? The only place it looks like it vents in is the fog lights. And a hydrolocked engine voids the warranty.

I’m not talking about any photo. But crossing a knee deep brook should NOT be a problem for a trail 4X4 with low range, etc. Trails do have brooks sometimes. And you probably wouldn’t think twice about crossing a flooded intersection either, a few inches above the curb. So once the engine pops out a rod, they’ll deny the warranty.

You can see the filter box in the 3rd photo. It draws cool air from the inner fender and you everything is well sealed in front. The top of the fog light opening is usually vented for cool intake air. Front grills direct air to the radiator/condenser. And the wheel well liner is well sealed to keep mud from collecting. So you tell me where cool air comes in…

That still doesn’t say the intake is only 15″ off the ground. Wheel and tire diameter would tend to indicate 20″ or higher. Either way, this is STRICTLY speculation as nobody has given this specific data that I am aware of.

It’s just something to watch out for that most people rarely consider. I didn’t mean to offend. But I’ve seen it happen too many times. And the OEMs don’t give a SH!T. A brand new car with a blown engine and 2 guesses who’s stuck with a $7,500 repair? Too many little cars that I’ve checked have the snorkel right behind the fog light. And slammed Acuras are always the 1st to stall out in 10″ of water. Lots of stock Hondas too. But if it stalls out on ya, DO NOT try to restart it. That’s when serious engine damage occurs. Not the initial stall. Just an FYI.

Like I said, as usual you make assumptions about a vehicle without any verifiable data to back it up. Maybe you’re correct about most smaller cars. Then again, most smaller cars aren’t branded with the Jeep name, which carries a very distinct reputation. However, NO car in my years of owning cars has had the actual engine air intake that low on the body. Even my ’96 Camaro, with almost no visible air intake on the front at all, had the actual air intake on top of the radiator housing–above the engine itself. My current Jeep Wrangler has the STOCK air intake high in the engine bay while my F-150 has the intake again high in the engine bay. In fact, the only car I’ve owned with a ‘low’ intake was my Saturn Vue–with the intake level with the headlamps just to one side of the grill. My point? You can’t assume that the Renegade–especially since it’s Jeep-branded–will have its engine air intake set so low on the body; most auto manufacturers KNOW that a car will occasionally confront flooded streets and as we’ve seen, most are capable of handling water at least up to their wheel hubs or over their bumpers. As such, the likely minimum height even for those small cars you list is 12″ with the average more likely 15″ or higher. This being a Jeep and understanding the design aesthetics a little better, I would expect (I will NOT assume, however) that the intake height is between 18″ to 20″ off the road. I’m willing to wait and see before I make any final conclusions.

But jeepers, if happens to Jeeps, what chance to normal cars have in 8″ of water? Remember, trucks going the other way or passing create a wave/surge. Then GULP!!!

OEMs are faced with the challenge of pulling in cold air with tightly sealed front ends. The fog light openings or under the bumper are usually the ideal spot. If the engine gets wasted, it not on them… “You submerged it…”

The answer to that question is extremely obvious, Denver, the drivers were NOT taking the water the way they’re supposed to. A Jeep is not a boat designed to throw roostertails as you plow throw puddles at maximum speed. A Jeep Wrangler specifically is capable of fording two feet of water bone stock, though aftermarket air cleaners (which some dealerships do add to some Wranglers) reduce that capability.

In this case however, the simple answer is that by going through the puddles at speed he literally threw water up into the air intake. The same thing happened in the second video. By taking the water course more slowly he would have been fine. By ensuring that he really did have a STOCK air box, he might have been fine. Had he a snorkel on the Jeep, he could have gone through nearly six FEET of water just fine–but probably not at that speed.

What part of “modified” don’t you understand? A desert runner typically has a different air cleaner installed–one that REMOVES THE AIR BOX. I’m quite familiar with Jeep Wranglers, you know. I happen to own one. I probably know more about the Jeep Wrangler than you EVER will, and I admit I don’t know everything. But obviously I know more than you.

Who the heck modifies a Wrangler to inhale water??? The 1st thing you do is lift it with bigger tires. Do you have a CAI to give you 1.2 extra hp? Where does it pull air from???

The only mods to the intake I see is snorkels reaching the top of the windshield. Thats the mod you want. But most leave their intake/filter alone. Like in the videos I showed you. But that can be the problem. I’ve got more if you want them…

I’ve been around Jeeps all my frack’n life! Same as everyone else. I’ve spent 1,000s of hour riding in them, driving them, working on them (including when hydrolocked), and pulling them out of mud/water/sand. Who do you think you’re taking to???

But I definitely gave them the ‘business’ when I had to rescue them in my 2wd Hard Body!!!

@DiM
Living in that Winnipeg government welfare apartment is very evident.

Again, you have shown you know very little about offroading. If you leave your innercity abode and remove yourself from the spam you spread around cyberspace you would realise you don’t lift a 4×4 for wading.

You buy what is called a snorkel.

You city boys don’t have an idea do ya!

Maybe that why you don’t have a clue about pickups as well. You are probably to used to public transport.

I agree with Big Al on this one; you are so uninformed it’s silly! You can go to ANY Jeep specialty shop, JCWhitney catalog, Jeep Essentials catalog, even Mopar itself and find wide-open air breathers for Jeeps and even most pickup trucks. Believe it or not, that’s one way you can up your fuel mileage by a few percent. BUT… it does affect how much fording you can do. You have to take it much more slowly to keep from spraying it up onto the intake AND it lowers said intake by as much as a foot.

It’s the same sort of thing as when people would flip their old ’60s and ’70s air cleaner covers upside down so flow wasn’t as restricted into the carburetor. More bottom end grunt as well.

So “who the heck modifies a Wrangler to inhale water???” Everyone who want a ‘grunting machine for rock climbing and other technical off-road travel and doesn’t expect to ever cross water more than a couple feet deep–and even then doing it slowly so they don’t spray water up under the hood.

Vulpine, your knee-jerk and absurdly emotional response to any criticism of the new Fiat-based Jeeps, like the Renegade (which as a matter of FACT is closely related to the Fiat 500 whether you care to admit it or not) reminds me of religious or political dogmatism.

Face it, the Fiat-derived “Jeeps” such as the Renegade have about as much in common with true Jeeps as the Aston Martin Cygnet (a rebadged Toyota Aygo) does with true Aston Martins.

Things change, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. Let us not even approach a level of discourse regarding what does or does not retain true Jeep attributes where anyone even remotely implies that the raised Renegade-500-Fiat has anything in common with a true Jeep.

So Jeep owners are FURIOUSLY angry at Chrys/Fiat for
Wranglers that are so easily ruined in curb high puddles, when they modified them all along to inhale water directly???

Only YOU would come up with such a silly scenario! Who would severely limit an off-road truck’s ability to “OFF-ROAD”? For the sake of a couple extra HPs. That you can’t even feel? Are we still talking Jeeps? Or street racing Civics???

Think about how Wranglers are marketed. So again, what part of RUBICON don’t you understand?

@DW: WHOSE “knee-jerk and absurdly emotional response…”? By NO means has my response been “absurdly emotional” in the manner this one outburst by you is.

For one thing, while you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT that this is a Fiat platform, that doesn’t preclude the fact that it carries the Jeep name and Fiat would be foolish to not give it capabilities at least equivalent to the original Willys Jeep. Clearly the Cherokee–especially the Cherokee Trailhawk–is proving itself Jeep capable despite riding a similar platform. I see no problem with the Renegade as long as owners realize that it’s not a Wrangler. The commonality is the simple fact that it IS as capable as the original Jeep, even if not as capable as the modern rock-crawling Wranglers.

On the other hand, your absolute zealotry against ANYTHING Fiat-related has become more than evident.

As for you, Mr. Denver know-nothing Mike, you too prove your zealotry and ignorance by ignoring anything that opposes your specific point of view about a given product. Your intentional misspellings prove that your responses are purely emotional simply because your logic has been so thoroughly shot down.

There are two kinds of Jeepers and the TRUE Jeepers despise the off-road idiots with the same kind of vitriol you display–for a different reason. The Jeepers you support are the type who prefer to blast full-throttle through everything; their whole attitude is to do it as fast as possible, devil take how much damage they do in the process. It’s this kind of Jeeper that inspires extremist environmental groups to push for the banning of all off-road vehicles, no matter the size or type. They’re also the type to get violently abusive in language and action when their own stupidity gets them into a situation a little forethought and understanding could have avoided.

You see, over 40 years ago I took a one-wheel-drive Chevy II through a muddy trail that a lifted, massively-overblown V8-modified Jeep got stuck in. Why? Because he thought he could power through anything when all that happened was that he spun his wheels and dug himself up to the hubs. If a one-wheel-drive “compact” sedan can go through and the Jeep couldn’t, guess which driver really knows how to drive his car.

I’ve taken my own Jeep through 20″ of water, plus or minus, so I know how to do it and I KNOW what kinds of modifications are available, even though mine is still bone stock after 7 years of driving it. It’s also taken trails at Roush Creek Off Road Park in Pennsylvania that–at the time–TJ owners said would be impossible for it without lifting. The words–bone stock–are the telling words, because the Rubicons in the videos you presented were NOT “bone stock”.

@Vulpine – You don’t know how I behave off road, any more than I know how you behave at bath houses, as a hole.

But most of my miles spent off road is while hiking. So trucking through the great outdoors, I know to leave as little evidence of my passing through as possible. And the technical aspects off-roading are completely relatable and redundant with road racing and commercial trucking. Weight transfer, contact patch, torque multiplication. etc.

So which are the mods done to the Wranglers and Rubicon I showed you? Make a list.

But those aren’t “intentional” misspellings. I’m functionally illiterate when it comes to spelling. I read at college level though, but spelling has never been my forte. But perfect spelling is just memorization of characters, punctuation, sentence structure, etc. Effortless for you, but different sides of the brain. So I became an advanced reader for age 8 when I stumbled upon Road&Track, CAR and DRIVER, Hot Rod, Pickup Van and 4WD, and Rods & Customs. I subscribed to all of them.

No doubt the time you spent advancing your (law) degree, I was under a hood or behind the wheel, counselor…

@DM: “Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to believe” — Laurence J. Peter (1919 – 1988)

My friend, you have gotten so tangled up in your zealotry that you don’t even know what you’re saying any more. With every exclamation you make, you prove ever on that you simply don’t know what you’re talking about.

@Vulpine – You’re just shifty and shady. You won’t say what you do for food, but I can spot a shyster lawyer from a mile away. Have you passed the BAR yet? Practicing law anyways? You can’t answer a direct question for you’re just full of sh!t. You just keep diverting.

And this Lawrence guy you keep quoting, I wouldn’t know in a million years of not cracking scholarly books.

And you wouldn’t know a pinion nut from a pistachio. You’re fake all around.